Author: eohara (Page 17 of 28)

O’Hara 2QSQ #2 – 9:11:23

PART 1: PREPARING FOR DISCUSSION

SOURCE IDEAS:

“Perhaps this is one of the reasons why, unlike the monsters of classical antiquity, Frankenstein’s persecution of his monster is no entry ticket for him to the heroic status, but rather forces the reader to ask which of the two is the greatest monster: is it Frankenstein for rejecting and wanting to destroy his “child,” no matter how ugly he is, or is it the monster for turning against the “parent” who gave him life, no matter how badly he treats him?”(240-241).

“So whilst Jeckyll’s inner evil is presented as a fundamental part of the human condition, Wilde comes closer to Shelley’s presentation of human nature as turning monstrous due to the effects of the outside world upon the individual” (251).

SYNTHESIZING COMMENT/ANALYSIS:

I find that these two passages connect on a very prominent theme when I think of contemporary monsters where, in some cases, we as readers or an audience want to take the side of the monster — or to speak to well-known situations, the “bad guy.” I think both of these passages draw at the point that we are getting a backstory and a narrative from the monster that other characters in the story aren’t. For instance, Victor isn’t hearing all we do from his monster — that emotion and longing for human connection and acceptance turning bitter and violet; he sees the effects while we understand the human pain associated. With Wilde, it is more this idea that we can see the societal shifts and understand the seemingly unavoidable nature of corruption, but again, we can see the workings of Dorian’s mind and the subtle encroachments that others in his society cannot. This brings to mind the point Cohen makes in his last thesis, “The Monster Stands at the Threshold of Becoming,” where he alleges, “They bring not just a fuller knowledge of our place in history and the history of knowing our place, but they bear self-knowledge, human-knowledge — and a discourse all the more sacred as it arises from the Outside”(Cohen 20). As with Six and Thompson’s excerpts, this uncomfortableness spurs from being forced as audiences to examine not just the monster but why we feel bad for them – thus, acknowledging this connection to the ‘we’ who created them, pushing them to become representatives of the other and outsider.

QUESTION:

How does this idea Cohen raises that monsters ask us why we have created them maybe lead into a discussion of how constructed our social conventions are, in the Victorian age and now. Suppose we accept the argument that monsters in the Victorian period hit on cultural anxieties and social norms. In that case, it might be interesting to question what it means that monsters in contemporary works bear less of a physical embodiment of a monster that we see in Frankenstein’s monster or Victor Hugo’s Quasimodo and more of the internal characteristics and perspectives. What could this physicality have gained to the themes and messages of monster culture in the 19th century that we don’t adhere to as much today? Would we call what would have been a monster a villain today?

PART 2: IN-CLASS WRITING RESPONSE (NAME:__________________)

O’Hara 2QSQ #1 – 9:7:23

SOURCE IDEAS:

“In its function as dialectical Other or third-term supplement, the monster is an incorporation of the Outside, the Beyond — of all those loci that are rhetorically placed as distant and distinct but originates Within.” (Cohen 7).

“The narratives of the West perform the strangest dance around that fire in which miscegenation and its practitioners have been condemned to burn. Amoung the flames we see the old women of Salem hanging, accused of sexual relations with the black devil; we suspect they died because they crossed a different border, one that prohibits women from managing property and living solitary, unmanaged lives” (Cohen 16).

SYNTHESIZING COMMENT/ANALYSIS:

This first source comes from the fourth thesis on “The Monster Dwells at the Gates of Difference,” and to me, this idea of reflecting on the monster’s ability to take the literary embodiment of the Other while in many cases having been created by someone or something within is very interesting. The subtle fears or well-known societal/cultural discriminations of the unknown, whether unfamiliar traditions, values, different races, politics, gender, etc., can be hoisted upon a monster. Connecting with Cohen’s later point under the fifth thesis, “The Monster Polices the Borders of the Possible,” I found the section regarding political fears within a given society to be a place where we so often see real damage outside of the literary realm. The example of the Salem witch trials, for instance, showed a much deeper set of fears within that community manifested into monstrous and demonic characteristics and accusations — absolutely utilizing this idea of the monster as the Other, living outside their pure, rigid, and idealized norms. It reminded me of Frances Hill’s book “A Delusion of Satan,” where we can identify the root of many deeper societal anxieties and fears surrounding their reality, such as dieases, Indigenous conflict, and living in such a

repressive culture — especially for women and girls. Thus, identifying a monster, the Other( the witches), they now have a common, unifying enemy that feels as though they can have some say over the true unknowns that plagued their lives.

QUESTION:

From these two excerpts and thinking about how monsters are depicted in contemporary works, I wonder where we might explore the idea of the other/social and political fears today. Are we perhaps moving away from the othering of monsters to condemn real-life people/values and into more of what Cohen also stated is the perspective we gain when monsters approach our world as outsiders looking in? I am thinking about a recent adaptation of Camille DeAngelis’ novel ‘Bones & All’ where the idea of cannibalism and monstrous ac<vi<es are humanized and drive much deeper points about the need for identity and human connec< in society. Rather than try and pin all the errors of other people and other cultures into monsters, we can try and recognize the shortcomings that brought about the monster.

PART 2: IN-CLASS WRITING RESPONSE (NAME:__________________)